What meanings of democracy are invoked in talk about democratization and music, and how does this discourse reflect struggles over democracy in our time? Contemporary music scholars and commentators have relied on ‘democratization’ to measure the promises and possibilities of music in the digital age. Yet ‘democracy’ is conceived in this discourse as a technological rather than a historical achievement, undermining its normative foundation. Two historical instances in which musicians and critics in the US engaged in democratic controversies through music highlight the contingency of the linkage between network metaphors and liberal notions of the public sphere that underpin the current democratization discourse. Debates about American classical music in the mid-nineteenth century and jazz in the mid-twentieth illustrate that notions of democracy are tied to historical context and contested as different social issues and conflicts arise. I suggest that critical analysis of music attend to the contested meanings of democracy in the contemporary period, noting its uncomfortably close association with libertarianism. Finally, I reflect on whether democracy might be decoupled from network structures and reconnected to historical struggles in this rethinking, or if different criteria are needed to speak to the question of why or how music matters.

在谈论民主化和音乐时，民主的含义是什么，这些话语如何反映我们这个时代的民主斗争？当代音乐学者和评论家依靠“民主化”来衡量数字时代音乐的前景和可能性。然而，在这种话语中，“民主”被视为一种技术而非历史成就，从而破坏了其规范基础。美国音乐家和评论家通过音乐参与民主争论的两个历史实例突出了网络隐喻与支撑当前民主化话语的公共领域自由观念之间联系的偶然性。关于 19 世纪中叶的美国古典音乐和 20 世纪中叶的爵士乐的争论表明，民主的概念与历史背景密切相关，并且随着不同的社会问题和冲突的出现而存在争议。我建议对音乐的批判性分析关注当代民主有争议的意义，并指出它与自由主义的密切联系。最后，我反思民主是否可以在这种重新思考中与网络结构脱钩并重新与历史斗争联系起来，或者是否需要不同的标准来讨论音乐为何重要或如何重要的问题。注意到它与自由主义的紧密联系令人不安。最后，我反思民主是否可以在这种重新思考中与网络结构脱钩并重新与历史斗争联系起来，或者是否需要不同的标准来讨论音乐为何重要或如何重要的问题。注意到它与自由主义的紧密联系令人不安。最后，我反思民主是否可以在这种重新思考中与网络结构脱钩并重新与历史斗争联系起来，或者是否需要不同的标准来讨论音乐为何重要或如何重要的问题。